Attn Maury parents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish someone would run the ## and figure out how many IB students are not attending Miner. If the whole neighborhood just enrolls in a Maury/Miner cluster, then we'll have a great, diverse, urban school. People should not be so scared of change. At the same time I think if this is DCPS's solution they need to sweeten the pot somehow, perhaps with a dual language program or a Reggio ECE program.

If it's such a fantastic idea why would they need to sweeten the deal

Because people are scared of the unknown, and any incentive to get them to walk in the door is a good thing.

Please, this is our neighborhood school we're talking about. Let's not make this about scoring cheap points. The fact is that a cluster could work very well if people put aside their fears and their need to control everything.

That won't happen. Look at Watkins. A large OOB population is going to keep in-bounds families away. The reason Brent and Maury flipped is in large part because of their small size, so they didn't need a lot of buy in to create a majority IB school. By creating a Maury/Minor mega-school all you're doing is screwing in-bounds Maury families.

For the record I'm an IB Maury family and I don't think in these terms. I don't think I have a vested right in my school, and I don't think sharing resources with another neighborhood school is being "screwed." If my neighbors are so dog in the manger that they'll refuse to enroll ... well who's screwing whom?

Collectivism at its finest. You must pay into the community school comrade but no of course we cannot guarantee you will get to enjoy it, it belongs to the community you see

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.

How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

Maury parents don't want this for the same reason most parents don't enroll their kindergartner in one school and then enroll their 1st grader in a different elementary school in the next neighborhood over. It makes no sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that the DCPS is proposing to merge Maury and Miner together because the construction budget for Maury is not large enough to service the current boundary.

Here's why this is crazy:

1. DCPS just redrew the boundary 2 years ago for Maury and made it bigger. Now apparently it's too big. So this is a mistake of DCPS' own making
2. Everyone here knows the modernization budgets in this city are crazy but I've never heard of them merging 2 school buildings because of a tight construction budget. This is the same DCPS that has spent over $200 million on Duke Ellington, which has fewer kids than Maury and enrolls Maryland students!! So WHY DONT THEY ASK THE CITY FOR MORE MONEY INSTEAD
3. This seems like a thinly veiled attempt to salvage Miner, which has abysmal performance. But combining 1 good school & 1 bad school together =/= 1 successful school
4. I strongly doubt Miner parents want to be inundated with Maury families and I know for a fact that Maury parents don't want their kids to go to Miner

DCPS is asking parents to complete this survey. If you think this is crazy (or maybe you think it's great, IDK), I encourage you to take the survey:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdq-Y8TRjflX9ySc8x2ipkqgHOT8EafXNjKqQ1UKHxzlpTydg/viewform

I don't know where I come out on this issue but OP's "argument" is just silly, self involved and a tad bit racist and classist. Let's examine, shall we?

1. And??? what exactly is her point? Yes, the original decision was made by DCPS. And let's assume for the sake of argument that the boundaries were too big and it created a problem. There is a problem, so now it has to be solved. OP's post doesn't propose another outcome, it just says that DCPS created it. So because they created it they cannot or should not solve it? Your argument is what I would expect from a pre-teen or teen.
2. Money doesn't equal land. Unless, of course, you want them to annex the houses on the block. Also, the fact that there were silly cost oveerruns and excessive spending elsewhere doesn't mean they should repeat the behavior. That's a child's response. As a taxpayer I would like to see excessive spending stopped, not perpetuated. Although I am guessing that OP would argue that DCPS should overspend on Maury so they get theirs, but then stop such irresponsible spending. That argument would be consistent with the self involved and juvenile "logic" in the rest of OP's post.
3. "Salvage Miner"? Wow (and I don't live near there and my kids don't go there so I do not have a horse in this race), but wow! It doesn't need salvaging. It's not where Maury or Brent or LT are, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have the right to exist. As to your second thought here, yes, there is no denying that part of the solution here is to try and solve an overcrowding issue with an action that also might benefit another school. But that's actually a smart approach. As to your little equation, um, the data suggests that these types of actions actually do work. You have the right to take issue with the data, but your silly equation just makes you look ignorant for not even understanding that such data exists.
4. This was my favorite of the four generally ignorant and angry statements. Please tell us why Miner families wouldn't want to be "inundated with Maury families". Are you all too well spoken? Rich? Educated? White? What's the subtext here, please tell us all high and mighty. I bet that Miner families would love to have engaged parents and high performing kids join their school. Whether they would want you coming along with your kids is a horse of a different color altogether.

Again, I do not have kids at Maury or Miner. And the proposed merger deserves a careful and serious consideration. OP's absurd post just isn't that.

I love you. Bravo.

Future Miner parent who would love me some Maury parents.

Yes, as a fellow Miner parent I agree, but only Maury parents that support real diversity.

With some of these comments I know why Trump won and it wasn't because of the Miner parents and their friends and family.

Yeah I'm sure Maury was responsible for Trump's 4% of the vote in DC ... maybe instead what you're discovering is that even progressive minded people do not support poorly designed experiments to merge schools when the real solution is a few extra bucks in the capital budget

What one discovers is the lack of concern with policies that continue to support the more privileged class in our society with no regard for history and disparate impact. Implicit bias is an issue all progressives should be honest about.

Yeah uhh how about I do what's best for my family instead. Try brainwashing someone else with that nonsense

While I disagree and support Clinton's belief that it does take a village, always welcome dialogue with the 46%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish someone would run the ## and figure out how many IB students are not attending Miner. If the whole neighborhood just enrolls in a Maury/Miner cluster, then we'll have a great, diverse, urban school. People should not be so scared of change. At the same time I think if this is DCPS's solution they need to sweeten the pot somehow, perhaps with a dual language program or a Reggio ECE program.

If it's such a fantastic idea why would they need to sweeten the deal

Because people are scared of the unknown, and any incentive to get them to walk in the door is a good thing.

Please, this is our neighborhood school we're talking about. Let's not make this about scoring cheap points. The fact is that a cluster could work very well if people put aside their fears and their need to control everything.

That won't happen. Look at Watkins. A large OOB population is going to keep in-bounds families away. The reason Brent and Maury flipped is in large part because of their small size, so they didn't need a lot of buy in to create a majority IB school. By creating a Maury/Minor mega-school all you're doing is screwing in-bounds Maury families.

For the record I'm an IB Maury family and I don't think in these terms. I don't think I have a vested right in my school, and I don't think sharing resources with another neighborhood school is being "screwed." If my neighbors are so dog in the manger that they'll refuse to enroll ... well who's screwing whom?

Collectivism at its finest. You must pay into the community school comrade but no of course we cannot guarantee you will get to enjoy it, it belongs to the community you see

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.

How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

No it's a good, small school that doesn't want to be a huge school riddled with the issues that Miner has today. Miner has 20% homeless population. Miner has gone through three principles in the past few years. The Cluster is a disaster. No need to ruin a good thing because of poor planning.

- brown parent of brown kids inbound for Maury

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish someone would run the ## and figure out how many IB students are not attending Miner. If the whole neighborhood just enrolls in a Maury/Miner cluster, then we'll have a great, diverse, urban school. People should not be so scared of change. At the same time I think if this is DCPS's solution they need to sweeten the pot somehow, perhaps with a dual language program or a Reggio ECE program.

If it's such a fantastic idea why would they need to sweeten the deal

Because people are scared of the unknown, and any incentive to get them to walk in the door is a good thing.

Please, this is our neighborhood school we're talking about. Let's not make this about scoring cheap points. The fact is that a cluster could work very well if people put aside their fears and their need to control everything.

That won't happen. Look at Watkins. A large OOB population is going to keep in-bounds families away. The reason Brent and Maury flipped is in large part because of their small size, so they didn't need a lot of buy in to create a majority IB school. By creating a Maury/Minor mega-school all you're doing is screwing in-bounds Maury families.

For the record I'm an IB Maury family and I don't think in these terms. I don't think I have a vested right in my school, and I don't think sharing resources with another neighborhood school is being "screwed." If my neighbors are so dog in the manger that they'll refuse to enroll ... well who's screwing whom?

Collectivism at its finest. You must pay into the community school comrade but no of course we cannot guarantee you will get to enjoy it, it belongs to the community you see

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.

How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

No it's a good, small school that doesn't want to be a huge school riddled with the issues that Miner has today. Miner has 20% homeless population. Miner has gone through three principles in the past few years. The Cluster is a disaster. No need to ruin a good thing because of poor planning.

- brown parent of brown kids inbound for Maury

so brown kids are ok but not poor brown kids? Got it. If Maury is such a good school why the low IB%?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish someone would run the ## and figure out how many IB students are not attending Miner. If the whole neighborhood just enrolls in a Maury/Miner cluster, then we'll have a great, diverse, urban school. People should not be so scared of change. At the same time I think if this is DCPS's solution they need to sweeten the pot somehow, perhaps with a dual language program or a Reggio ECE program.

If it's such a fantastic idea why would they need to sweeten the deal

Because people are scared of the unknown, and any incentive to get them to walk in the door is a good thing.

Please, this is our neighborhood school we're talking about. Let's not make this about scoring cheap points. The fact is that a cluster could work very well if people put aside their fears and their need to control everything.

That won't happen. Look at Watkins. A large OOB population is going to keep in-bounds families away. The reason Brent and Maury flipped is in large part because of their small size, so they didn't need a lot of buy in to create a majority IB school. By creating a Maury/Minor mega-school all you're doing is screwing in-bounds Maury families.

For the record I'm an IB Maury family and I don't think in these terms. I don't think I have a vested right in my school, and I don't think sharing resources with another neighborhood school is being "screwed." If my neighbors are so dog in the manger that they'll refuse to enroll ... well who's screwing whom?

Collectivism at its finest. You must pay into the community school comrade but no of course we cannot guarantee you will get to enjoy it, it belongs to the community you see

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.

How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

No it's a good, small school that doesn't want to be a huge school riddled with the issues that Miner has today. Miner has 20% homeless population. Miner has gone through three principles in the past few years. The Cluster is a disaster. No need to ruin a good thing because of poor planning.

- brown parent of brown kids inbound for Maury

so brown kids are ok but not poor brown kids? Got it. If Maury is such a good school why the low IB%?

Maury has a higher percentage of IB kids than Brent. Not necessarily a good metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish someone would run the ## and figure out how many IB students are not attending Miner. If the whole neighborhood just enrolls in a Maury/Miner cluster, then we'll have a great, diverse, urban school. People should not be so scared of change. At the same time I think if this is DCPS's solution they need to sweeten the pot somehow, perhaps with a dual language program or a Reggio ECE program.

If it's such a fantastic idea why would they need to sweeten the deal

Because people are scared of the unknown, and any incentive to get them to walk in the door is a good thing.

Please, this is our neighborhood school we're talking about. Let's not make this about scoring cheap points. The fact is that a cluster could work very well if people put aside their fears and their need to control everything.

That won't happen. Look at Watkins. A large OOB population is going to keep in-bounds families away. The reason Brent and Maury flipped is in large part because of their small size, so they didn't need a lot of buy in to create a majority IB school. By creating a Maury/Minor mega-school all you're doing is screwing in-bounds Maury families.

For the record I'm an IB Maury family and I don't think in these terms. I don't think I have a vested right in my school, and I don't think sharing resources with another neighborhood school is being "screwed." If my neighbors are so dog in the manger that they'll refuse to enroll ... well who's screwing whom?

Collectivism at its finest. You must pay into the community school comrade but no of course we cannot guarantee you will get to enjoy it, it belongs to the community you see

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.

How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

No it's a good, small school that doesn't want to be a huge school riddled with the issues that Miner has today. Miner has 20% homeless population. Miner has gone through three principles in the past few years. The Cluster is a disaster. No need to ruin a good thing because of poor planning.

- brown parent of brown kids inbound for Maury

Miner isn't 20% homeless. It's principALs.

[Anonymous]

NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

[Anonymous]

ummm yes, it's a public school? I don't love the way this is being introduced, but it's a public school. nobody owns it.

I believe the point being made is that when parents invest time, money and energy into their neighborhood school, they develop an expectation that they will continue to be able to send their kids (and siblings) there. When you talk about redrawing boundaries or consolidating schools, it puts that at risk. No one owns the school. But neighborhood residents have a reasonable expectation that a fully-enrolled, successful school should remain a stable option for them to send their kids to. It's why many people purchased the homes that they did.

Imagine a loyal tenant that pays his rent on time for years and years. If the landlord decided to change the terms of the lease without warning, or evict him, everyone on these boards would leap to the defense of the tenant and trash the landlord. But when it comes to schools, everyone here has so much pent-up aggression, you willfully ignore the fact that Maury parents have a legitimate gripe with the poor planning, the half-baked idea to combine schools, and the awful way it's been communicated.



How is it half baked? Seriously, other than white parents not wanting to merge with poors and browns, what are the cons and pros to this proposal? Only half of students IB for Maury choose to attend there right?

No it's a good, small school that doesn't want to be a huge school riddled with the issues that Miner has today. Miner has 20% homeless population. Miner has gone through three principles in the past few years. The Cluster is a disaster. No need to ruin a good thing because of poor planning.

- brown parent of brown kids inbound for Maury

Miner isn't 20% homeless. It's principALs.

Socio-economic privilege must be checked. Discrimination in all forms must be opposed.

Disregarding human beings due to the fact they are poor are not the values held by companionate people that care for their whole community as opposed to their narrow interests.

I hope that those enabling the mentality held by many in the 46% never have to deal with the struggle of housing, food, or health care insecurity. If you do face it, I hope you'll have compassionate people around you that will help you in your time of struggle as opposed to building a wall and caring only for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

Nothing wrong with being homeless. We need to build communities of inclusion, not walls of division

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

Nothing wrong with being homeless. We need to build communities of inclusion, not walls of division

This thread has really turned into some SJW silliness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

Nothing wrong with being homeless. We need to build communities of inclusion, not walls of division

This thread has really turned into some SJW silliness

You're not from the Maury community. Probably you should not comment here. Plenty of parents in the Maury community share the values of inclusiveness. I imagine that many of us would indeed be upset and worried about a cluster, but please leave the alt-right lingo out of this conversation.

OP I wish you hadn't posted this on DCUM. Ugliness all around. This survey has already been pushed out to Maury parents on other channels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

Nothing wrong with being homeless. We need to build communities of inclusion, not walls of division

This thread has really turned into some SJW silliness

You're not from the Maury community. Probably you should not comment here. Plenty of parents in the Maury community share the values of inclusiveness. I imagine that many of us would indeed be upset and worried about a cluster, but please leave the alt-right lingo out of this conversation.

OP I wish you hadn't posted this on DCUM. Ugliness all around. This survey has already been pushed out to Maury parents on other channels.

Telling people they shouldn't comment or post things doesn't seem very inclusive to me

[Anonymous]

Don't panic, folks. The idea is obviously a non-starter, because almost the entire Maury community is going to fight it tooth and nail. It's a no brainer that droves of well-educated, connected and determined parents, including dozens of lawyers, are going to zealously sink it deeply logical reasons. DCPS and Allen were seriously bone-headed to float such a dead-ended concept. It will gain no more traction than the the lottery clusters concept Jennifer Niles floated in 2012. A year hence, nobody will be talking about the merger that wasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. But 20% was the figure in 2013, the last year that it's publicly available.

http://www.dc-aya.org/sites/default/files/content/Homeless%20Student%20Enrollment%20in%20DCPS.pdf

Nothing wrong with being homeless. We need to build communities of inclusion, not walls of division

This thread has really turned into some SJW silliness

You're not from the Maury community. Probably you should not comment here. Plenty of parents in the Maury community share the values of inclusiveness. I imagine that many of us would indeed be upset and worried about a cluster, but please leave the alt-right lingo out of this conversation.

OP I wish you hadn't posted this on DCUM. Ugliness all around. This survey has already been pushed out to Maury parents on other channels.

I have lived on the Hill for twenty years, am a parent, and voted for Hillary.

Sorry to hear you think social justice is silly. Worked on homeless issues before and had a good friend growing up that was homeless at times.

I understand where you are coming from. Best of luck with your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't panic, folks. The idea is obviously a non-starter, because almost the entire Maury community is going to fight it tooth and nail. It's a no brainer that droves of well-educated, connected and determined parents, including dozens of lawyers, are going to zealously sink it deeply logical reasons. DCPS and Allen were seriously bone-headed to float such a dead-ended concept. It will gain no more traction than the the lottery clusters concept Jennifer Niles floated in 2012. A year hence, nobody will be talking about the merger that wasn't.

\

Well, clearly this is being floated as a way to bludgeon the Maury community into acccepting a crappy reno that takes away 1/2 of the open space as the alternative. So actually not that boneheaded.